Abstract
ABSTRACT Increased frequency of drought and shortage of irrigation water has challenged forage production in arid and semiarid regions. Farmers have shifted from corn ( Zea mays L.), as their primary source of forage, to more drought‐tolerant species such as millet ( Pennisetum glaucum L.); however, protein content of millet may be too low to meet the needs of high‐producing animals. A 2‐yr field experiment was conducted to determine if mixtures of millet with soybean ( Glycine max L.) could produce acceptable forage and protein yield and at the same time maintain farmers' profit level. Main plots consisted of nitrogen (N) rates of 0, 37, and 74 kg N ha −1 , and subplots were assigned to intercropping ratios (50:50, 60:40, and 40:60 millet–soybean) along with sole crops. Nitrogen application increased total dry matter yield, and millet sole crop had the highest yield (13.6 t ha −1 ) followed by 60:40 millet–soybean (13.1 t ha −1 ). The land equivalent ratio (LER) was highest (1.17) in 60:40 millet–soybean intercrops, indicating 17% more efficient use of land than sole crops. On the basis of the results from LER, relative crowding coefficient, and monetary advantage index, 60:40 millet–soybean was superior to the other intercropping ratios and sole crops. Also, the highest protein yield (2.49 t ha −1 ) was obtained from 60:40 millet–soybean intercrops. Considering both yield and nitrogen use efficiency, 60:40 millet–soybean intercropping ratio, fertilized at 74 kg N ha −1 , was advantageous and could be recommended as an alternative to millet sole crop to produce forage of high quality with no significant yield loss.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 8
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen application increased total dry matter yield.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Nitrogen application increased total dry matter yield”
t0“Millet–Soybean Intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole millet had the highest dry matter yield, 13.6 t ha −1.
Not reportedMaterial
Verbatim
e0“millet sole crop had the highest yield (13.6 t ha −1 )”
Claim · model-written summary
The 60:40 millet–soybean intercrop yielded 13.1 t ha −1.
Verbatim
e0“followed by 60:40 millet–soybean (13.1 t ha −1 )”
t0“total dry matter yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The 60:40 intercrop had the highest land equivalent ratio of 1.17.
Verbatim
e0“The land equivalent ratio (LER) was highest (1.17) in 60:40 millet–soybean intercrops”
Claim · model-written summary
The 60:40 intercrop used land 17% more efficiently than sole crops.
Verbatim
e0“indicating 17% more efficient use of land than sole crops”
t0“millet–soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Across LER, crowding coefficient, and monetary advantage index, the 60:40 intercrop was superior.
Verbatim
e0“On the basis of the results from LER, relative crowding coefficient, and monetary advantage index, 60:40 millet–soybean was superior to the other intercropping ratios and sole crops”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest protein yield was 2.49 t ha −1 in the 60:40 intercrop.
Verbatim
e0“the highest protein yield (2.49 t ha −1 ) was obtained from 60:40 millet–soybean intercrops”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend the 60:40 intercrop with 74 kg N ha −1 as a quality forage alternative.
Verbatim
e0“60:40 millet–soybean intercropping ratio, fertilized at 74 kg N ha −1 , was advantageous and could be recommended as an alternative to millet sole crop to produce forage of high quality with no significant yield loss”